The Politics of Fashion: Can Julia Louis-Dreyfus’s Style on Veep Win an Election?

In last weekend’s season premiere of Veep, we found Selina Meyer (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) gearing up to announce her bid for the presidency. In her classically incompetent way, she’s stuck in the Midwest with a new book to promote (inanely titled Some New Beginnings: Our Next American Journey) and undecided about who to name as her campaign manager. And while political issues will certainly dominate the show, we can’t help but wonder about how the role of the sartorial will influence the outcome. Can Selina Meyer become the first female commander in chief if she sticks with her current style?

There’s a particular kind of dowdiness that populates real-world Washington style—for both men and women. You might hear more of a fuss about the lack of a flag pin on a candidate’s lapel than who or what he or she is wearing. And that’s partially because in politics, clothes can’t be seen as a priority. To be sartorially conscious is to imply you’re not thinking about other, more important things. “You’ll see I wear only gray or blue suits,” Obama told Michael Lewis in a Vanity Fair profile in 2012. “I’m trying to pare down decisions. I don’t want to make decisions about what I’m eating or wearing. Because I have too many other decisions to make.”

Despite the fact that Veep is satire, and that the show is hilariously fictional, it’s impossible not to take note how Julia Louis-Dreyfus’s character is styled on the HBO show. Her clothes perfectly flatter her well-kept figure. And the actress seems to agree—in a recent interview with the Times, she called her wardrobe “constricting.” And it’s a silhouette echoed by Robin Wright’s character Claire Underwood on House of Cards with her precise wardrobe of close-fitting cocktail dresses. But is this how real women inside the Beltway dress?

Yes and no. Hillary Clinton is usually clad in bright colors and relaxed trousers—and her Twitter bio proudly bills herself as a “pantsuit aficionado.” And Kirsten Gillibrand, who, at 47 is roughly the same age as Louis-Dreyfus’s character, can more often be seen in a basic black blazer and flats, unlike Meyer’s predilection for stilettos and form-fitting frocks. Then there’s Wendy Davis, the state senator from Texas, whose dress choices have more in common with Meyer than most female politicians but who got nearly as much attention for her historic eleven-hour-long filibuster as did the pink Mizuno sneakers she wore on the floor that night. Many of these women dress with an understanding that to highlight their femininity is to make a statement. Their clothes, their hair, and their makeup are less style, more armor. But even their slightest fashion choices are open for interpretation in ways that aren’t for men. In the recent “Women in the World Conference,” held last week in New York, Thomas Friedman recounted a moment with Hillary Clinton about her tenure as Secretary of State: a world leader was frightened that Clinton would deliver bad news because her hair was tied back. “There is a double standard, obviously,” Clinton responded to the room. “We have all either experienced it or at the very least seen it. And there is a deep set of cultural psychological views that are manifest through this double standard.”

Stylistic choices by women in politics are open for interpretation by the press and the public. Who can forget the outrage over the First Lady’s official portrait, when she was photographed in a black sleeveless Michael Kors dress? Many deemed the move inappropriate and disrespectful, yet all we saw were Michelle Obama’s enviably toned biceps—not a hint of cleavage or bare legs on view. (Then recall the slavish reaction to a topless President Obama.) Or how about that time when Sarah Palin, who, way back in 2008, started off as a hockey mom from Alaska and then made headlines when she and her family were bequeathed a $150,000 fashion and beauty budget by the McCain team? The campaign expenses were judged as lavish, but has anyone bothered to check how much McCain spends on his shoes and suits? Was it because Palin looked a little too attractive in those four-inch heels that caused some to question the purchase in the first place?

Veep is clearly aware how well the vice president pulls off her look. In the last episode, Selina pointed out that her “amazing ass” might have something to do with the fact that she’s achieved so much. In the Times, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that Louis-Dreyfus’s character “strikes that balance between what’s glamorous and what’s appropriate for a vice president.” Could it be that by choosing to tastefully highlight a female politician’s assets, television is making a case for using sex appeal as political advantage? And if so, is it possible this approach could win an election in real life?